EX 


74 
08 


-788- 


MEMOIR 


Off 


EINRICH  LEBERECHT  FLEISCHER, 


BY 


PROF.  A.   MttLLER,   PH.   D. 


FROM    THE    .SMITHSONIAN    KEPOKT    FOR    188P. 


WASHINGTON: 

GOVERNMKM'    PRINTING    ol'FICE. 

1892. 


-788- 


MEMOIR 


HEINRICH  LEBERECHT  FLEISCHER, 


BY 


PROF.  A.  MtfLLER,  PH.  D. 


FROM   THE    SMITHSONIAN   REPORT    FOR    1889, 


WASHINGTON: 

GOVERNMENT    PRINTING    OFFICE. 
1891*. 


MEMOIR  OF  I1EISRICH  LEBERECHT  FLEISCHER.* 


By  PROF.  A.  MULLER,  Ph.  D. 

Translated  l>y  Miss  HKXRIETIA  SZOLD. 


Were  it  desirable  to  single  out  the  rarest  and  most  admirable  among 
the  many  fine  qualities  of  the  great  and  good  scholar  to  whose  memory 
these  lines  are  devoted,  1  should  not  hesitate  to  name  the  perfect  self- 
denial  which  at  all  times  prompted  him  to  place  his  unparallelled  attain- 
ments at  the  disposal  of  others.  Among  German  orientalists  (if  Assyrio- 
legists  beexcepted),  few  will  be  found  who  have  not  profited  by  his  un- 
selfishness; and  abroad  likewise  there  are  many  who  are  similarly  in- 
debted. We  all  knew  where  to  seek  when  our  meager  stores  were  on  the 
point  of  giving  out,  and  we  stood  in  need  of  the  gifts  with  which  his  treas- 
ure-houses were  abundantly  filled.  In  dispensing  these  to  great  and  small, 
he  was  untiring,  generous,  and  impartial  as  God's  sun  which  shines 
upon  the  just  and  the  unjust  alike.  More  than  a  year  has  passed  since 
his  hand  has  grown  numb  and  his  eye  dim,  but  where  do  they  linger 
who  should  have  hastened  to  his  grave,  and  wreathed  with  tributes  of 
gratitude  the  hillock  which  nature,  slow  though  her  processes  are,  lias 
twice  decked  \vith  fresh  verdure?  I  blame,  I  accuse  no  one.  Many  -i 
shrinking  soul  hides  its  gratitude  in  reverential  silence  rather  than  pa- 
rade fine  and  tender  feelings  in  the  market-place.  Doubtless  there  are 
others  who  reluctantly  find  themselves  forced  by  the  cares  of  existence, 
by  daily  new  burthensome  tasks,  to  deny  themselves  the  fulfillment  of  a 
warmly  cherished  desire.  And  most  probably  there  are  still  others, 
here  and  there,  who,  like  the  writer  of  these  words,  are  even  now,  alter 
unavoidable  delay,  on  the  point  of  paying  the  long-planned  tribute  of 
piety.  Nevertheless  it  remains  a  sad  fact  that,  with  the  exception  of 
the  somewhat  business  like  though  not  unsympathetic  announcements 
of  the  French  Institute  and  of  the  Bavai  ian  Academy,  the  brief  remark's, 
accompanying  an  excellent  portrait  of  Fleischer  in  the  Leipzig  Illustrirte 
Zeitung,  an  article  in  the  AV/r  York  Times,  and  a  barren  notice  in  the 
London  Athencwm,  only  two  attempts  have  up  to  this  time  been  made 
to  give  adequate  and  becoming  treatment  to  the  work  of  this  distin- 
guished scholar:  Thorbecke's  sketch  in  the  Journal  of  the  German 

*  From  Bezzenberger's  Bcitriiijt  ;ur  Kitndt  der  indogermanischen  Sprachen,  Guttingen, 
1889,  vol.  xv,  pp.  319-337. 

507 


2107671 


508  MEMOIR    OF    FLEISCHER. 

Oriental  Society,  and  the  more  extended  memorial  address  by  Goldziher 
before  the  Hungarian  Academy.  Indeed  it  will  ever  be  humiliating  to 
German  orientalists,  that  although  more  than  a  year  has  elapsed  since 
Fleischer's  death,  the  only  searching  analysis  published  of  his  great 
activity  as  a  scholar  and  a  teacher  (and  such  Goldziher's*  essay  ob- 
viouslj"  is),  has  been  written  by  an  Hungarian  in  his  native  language, 
with  which  no  one  of  us  is  conversant. 

In  fact,  the  number  is  not  very  great  of  those  who  may  without  pre- 
sumption undertake  au  exhaustive  treatment  of  the  life  of  so  distin- 
guished a  scholar.  I  am  far  from  counting  myself  among  that  number, 
but  I  believe  I  have  learned  enough  to  enable  me  to  appreciate  to  a 
certain  extent  the  great  ability  of  him  who  acquired  such  vast  learning 
by  means  of  his  own  exertions;  and  I  truU  I  have  sufficient  judg- 
ment to  designate  at  least  approximately  the  rank  and  position  due 
my  deceased  teacher  in  the  history  of  our  science.  Precisely  here 
I  can  not  permit  the  motive  of  modesty  to  hinder  me  from  attempt- 
ing this  task,  for  the  reader  who  is  interested  in  the  science  of  Indo- 
European  languages  may  justly  wish  to  gain  an  idea  of  the  general  atti- 
tude of  a  scholar  whose  investigations  border  upon  his  own  sphere. 
That  my  task  also  involves  the  duty  of  pointing  out  the  natural  limita- 
tions of  his  activity  shall  not  hinder  me  from  carrying  out  my  intention. 
Next  to  unselfishness,  Fleischer's  most  prominent  trait  as  a  scholar 
was  his  love  of  truth.  He  himself  would  be  the  first  to  censure  me  if 
I  were  to  sketch  his  personality  in  white  on  a  white  back-ground,  ac- 
cording to  the  latest  fashion  among  painters.  Admiration  without  criti- 
cism is  valueless.  If,  feeling  the  former,  I  venture  to  U3e  the  latter,  no 
one  may  charge  me  with  presumptuousness.  He  is  a  poor  master  who 
trains  disciples  bereft  of  the  critical  faculty;  a  poor  disciple  he  who 
leans  unquestioniugly  upon  the  authority  of  even  a  deeply-revered 
master.  I  must  however  refrain  from  giving  a  detailed  description  of 
the  purely  human  side  of  his  being  and  life,  incomplete  though  his  pic- 
ture will  thus  remain.  I  consider  it  improper  to  forestall  a  full  presen- 
tation by  one  more  qualified  for  this  task,  who  can  base  his  assertions 
upon  intimate  acquaintance  with  all  the  incidents  and  relations  of  his 
private  life.  I  shall  confine  myself  to  outlines,  the  data  for  which  I 
owe  to  the  kindness  of  Prof.  Dr.  Curt  Fleischer,  of  Meissen.  They  thus 
may  claim  reliability  on  those  points  in  which  they  disagree  with  state- 
ments published  elsewhere. 

Heinrich  Leberecht  Fleischer  was  born  at  Schandau  on  February  21, 
1801.  His  father,  Johann  Gottfried  Fleischer,  an  officer  in  the  custom- 
service,  died  at  the  age  of  eighty-nine,  on  August  24,  1860,  at  Pirua, 
enjoying  at  that  time  a  pension  as  inspector  of  customs.  His  mother, 
whom  he  lost  as  early  as  August  10,  1825,  was  the  daughter  of  the 

'Emle'kbeszeM  Fleischer  Leberecht  Henrik  ;i  M.  Tiul.  Akade"mia  kiiUa»ja  felett. 
Goldziher  Ignac/  (a  Majjy.  Tiul.  Ak.  ellmnyt  ta<rjai  folott  tarttot  emle'kbesze'dek, 
Vkot.  4.  sziim).  Budapest,  M.  T.  Ak.,  1889,  44  p.,  8. 


MKMOIB    OF    FLEISCHER.  509 

parish  schoolmaster  Uuruh,  at  Prietitz,  near  Pulsnitz.  At  Schaudau 
the  boy  attended  the  public  school,  where  his  talents  soon  attracted 
th^  attention  of  the  principal,  Edelnrmn,  who  undertook  to  teach  young 
Fleischer  the  elements  of  Latin.  Thus  his  father  was  enabled  to  enter 
him  in  1814,  as  a  student  at  the  high-school  in  Bautzen,  where  he  re- 
mained until  1819.  Here  he  was  instructed  in  Hebrew,  thus  for  the 
first  time  coming  in  contact  with  the  Orient.  When  next  he  became 
interested  in  an  Eastern  subject  it  was  by  chance,  and  it  decided  his 
whole  future  career.  He  accidentally  found  among  the  wrapping-paper 
of  a  cheese-dealer  at  market  sheets  of  an  Arabic  grammar,  to  the  study 
ot  which  he  at  once  applied  himself.  He  became  so  deeply  interested  that 
when  he  entered  upon  his  course  in  the  University  of  Leipzig  at  Easter, 
18i9,  he  not  only  did  not  neglect  liis  theological  pursuits,  nor  fail  to 
devote  himself  under  the  guidance  of  Gottfried  Hermann  to  classical 
studies,  but  lie  also  indulged  his  love  for  Orieutalia.  In  fact,  after  hav- 
ing passed  with  distinction  a  theological  examination,  he  spent  one  more 
year  in  the  exclusive  study  of  Oriental  languages.  He  soon  arrived  at 
the  conviction  that  it  was  necessary  for  him  to  be  at  Paris  with  De  Sacy. 
By  the  assistance  of  a  young  French  merchant  named  Bernard,  with 
whom  he  had  become  acquainted,  he  succeeded  in  obtaining  a  position 
as  tutor  in  the  household  of  Mons.  de  Caulaincourt  (under  Napoleon. 
Duke  of  Viceuza).  On  March  4,  he  received  his  degree,  and  on  April  18, 
he  began  his  journey  to  Paris.  For  one  year  and  a  half  he  was  in  Caul- 
aincourt's  house.  Later  he  lived  alone,  earning  a  livelihood  by  giving 
private  lessons.  But  during  the  whole  time  he  was  zealously  occupied 
with  his  studies  under  De  Sacy,  paying  particular  attention  to  Arabic, 
Persian,  and  Turkish.  The  impression  made  upon  him  by  the  great 
French  savant  was  never  obliterated, — neither  by  the  work,  nor  the  suc- 
cess, nor  the  honors  with  which  his  long  life  was  replete.  He  continued 
to  pay  the  tribute  of  love  and  esteem  to  his  master  long  after  he  himself 
had  come  to  belooked  upon  as  the  master  Arabist.  At  the  same  time  he 
made  diligent  use  of  the  valuable  manuscripts  in  the  library.  Thus, 
the  first  essay  published  by  him  was  a  review,  in  the  Journal  Asiatique 
of  1827,  of  the  first  volume  of  Habicht's  edition  of  the  Thousand  and 
One  Nights,  based  upon  Galland's  manuscript.  His  editions  of  Abul- 
feda  and  Beidhawi,  as  well  as  the  essay.  De  glossis  Habichtianis,  all  pub- 
lished later  on,  are  also  proofs  of  his  industry  in  gathering  material 
while  at  Paris.  At  the  same  time  he  sought  the  society  of  Orientals, 
especially  of  two  Kgvptiaus,  a  Mohammedan — Refa'a,  and  a  Christian — 
Ayde,  both  mentioned  honoris  causa  in  the  above  named  essay.  Al- 
though the  article  in  the  Journal  dxiatique  shows  that  he  was  a  ripe 
scholar  at  that  time,  he  continued  to  devote  himself  after  his  return,  in 
18-3,  to  private  study,  partly  at  his  own  home  and  partly  at  Dresden, 
where  he  catalogued  the  Arabic,  Persian,  and  Turkish  manuscripts  in 
the  royal  library.  The  catalogue  was  published  at  Leipzig  in  1831; 
likewise,  his  edition  and  translation  of  Abulfeda's  Historic  ante-ixhtmica. 


510  MEMOIR    OF    FLEISCHER. 

Both  publications  proved  that  he  had  reached  the  goal  which  he  had 
been  pursuing  during  a  twelve  years'  preparatory  period,  entailing  con- 
stant hard  work  and  manifold  sacrifices.  In  the  preface  to  Abulfeda 
he  deplores  the  fewness  of  his  notes,  and  craves  indulgence  for  himself 
on  the  plea  of  being  a  homo  lectionis  pauccc,  memoricc  paucioris,  otiipau- 
cissimi.  But  the  character  of  his  work  is  such  as  to  invalidate  all  but 
the  last  of  the  three  excuses.  Meantime  he  had  accepted  iu  1831,  a 
position  as  teacher  in  the  Kreuz  high-school  at  Dresden.  Here  he  re- 
mained until  1835,  when,  the  above-mentioned  works  having  spread  his 
fame,  he  was  offered  a  professorship  at  St.  Petersburg,  later  filled  by 
Dorn.  He  was  about  to  leave  for  Eussia,  when,  in  the  nick  of  time,  the 
offer  of  a  full  professorship  of  Oriental  languages,  at  his  own  university 
of  Leipzig,  reached  him.  He  was  elected  on  October  19,  1835,  but  did 
not  enter  upon  the  duties  of  his  position  until  Easter,  183G.  At  first 
he  was  considered  a  member  of  the  theological  faculty,  but  early  iu  the 
next  decade  he  was  permitted,  after  active  agitation  on  his  own  part,  to 
pass  over  to  the  philosophical  faculty.  On  September  27, 1836,  he  mar- 
ried Ernestine  Mathilde  Jiissiug,  of  Bautzen,  the  daughter  of  Friedrich 
Leberecht  Jassing,  retired  brigade  judge  of  the  royal  Saxon  service, 
who  lived  at  that  time  in  Dresden.  He  was  permitted  to  celebrate,  with 
his  faithful  and  affectionate  wife,  who  still  survives,  the  fiftieth  anni- 
versary of  his  wedding-day,  and  was  blessed  with  the  joy — marred  only 
by  the  death  of  their  eldest  daughter — of  seeing  their  children  occupy 
positions  of  honor  in  the  community.  Not  less  happy  was  his  domestic 
life,  than  were  his  official  and  scientific  undertakings.  When,  in 
1846,  the  Royal  Saxon  Scientific  Society  was  founded,  he  at  once  became 
an  active  member.  In  1855,  he  became  its  assistant  secretary,  and  later, 
secretary  in  chief,  a  position  which  he  filled  with  his  customary  scrupu- 
lousness until  1883.  In  1860,  he  received  an  honorable  call  from  Berlin. 
He  refused  the  offer,  remaining  faithful  to  his  native  laud  until  his 
death. 

When  Fleischer  entered  upon  his  professorship  in  Leipzig,  iu  1836, 
Arabic- Mohammedan  studies  had  begun  to  flourish  in  all  parts  of  Ger- 
many. Between  1819  and  1829  there  had  been  published  five  of  the 
Mffallaqat,  with  the  scholia  of  Zauzaui,  by  Kosegarteu,  Heugstenberg, 
Roseumiiller,  and  Vullers;  in  1828,  the  text  of  the  Hamdsa,  by  Freytag; 
between  1825  and  1831,  the  first  six  volumes  of  Habicht's  Thousand 
and  One  Nights;  and  in  1828,  Kosegarten's  Chrestomathy  ;  Fn-y tag's 
Arabic  Poetics  (1830),  and  the  first  volume  of  his  great  lexicon  (1830), 
as  well  as  the  beginning  of  Ewald's  Gmmmatica  critica  (1831),  had  es- 
tablished the  principle  that  the  edition  of  texts  should  be  prepared 
with  due  regard  to  the  laws  of  the  language.  Meantime  another  Ger- 
man scholar — Frahn,  in  the  service  of  the  Russian  Government,  by  his 
Recensio  (1826),  had  laid  a  scientific  foundation  for  Islamic  numismatics. 
Dorn  was  beginning  to  assist  the  Petersburg  investigator,  and  Hammer- 
Purgstall,  unflagging,  continued  his  magnificent  work  at  Vienna.  The 


MEMOIR    OF    FLEISCHER.  511 

last-mentioned  scholars  prove  that  the  increased  interest  in  Arabic 
subjects  can  not  be  traced  entirely  to  outward  causes,  but  should  be 
connected  with  the  renascence  in  Germany  of  philological  studies  from 
an  historical  point  of  view.  On  the  other  hand,  the  efforts  of  the  first 
set  of  scholars  depend  entirely  upon  the  work  of  I)e  Sacy,  who  had 
been  the  teacher  of  Kosegarten  and  Freytag,  and  indirectly  through 
the  latter,  also  of  Vullers  and  Ilengsteuberg.  Even  Ewald,  inde- 
pendent though  he  was,  and  striving  to  master  for  linguistic  purposes, 
the  mateiial  bequeathed  by  Arabian  grammarians,  had  to  lean  upon 
De  Sacy  in  the  development  of  the  main  features  of  his  plan. 

The  times  have  been  when  it  was  customary,  if  not  with  Fleischer 
himself,  at  any  rate  with  a  few  of  his  disciples,  to  treat  somewhat  con- 
temptuously the  efforts  of  men  like  Freytag  and  Hammer-Purgstall  in 
behalf  of  Arabic  philology.  I  myself  must  confess  to  the  youthful  folly 
of  having,  in  my  tirst  very  imperfect  essay,  spoken  of  Hammer  in  away 
which  even  vivid  remembrance  of  Ahlwardt's  Chalaf  could  not  excuse, 
certainly  not  justify.  Deservedly,  I  was  at  once  reproved  by  a  more 
sensible  fellow-worker.*  Freytag  was  also  judged  unkindly,  though  per- 
haps not  with  equal  severity.  Even  the  numberless  corrections  which 
had  to  be  made  in  his  lexicon,  and  will  of  necessity  ever  continue  to  be 
made,  cannot  alter  the  fact  that  it  was  an  eminent  performance  at  the  time 
of  its  compilation,  and  still  remains  an  exceedingly  useful  work.  .Nat- 
urally, neither  Hammer  nor  Freytag,  neither  Kosegarten  nor  Vullers 
can  bear  comparison  with  the  master  mind  at  Paris.  The  last  three  are 
docile  disciples,  who  praiseworthy  for  industry,  and  estimable  for  at- 
tainments,  do  no  more  than  follow  in  the  footsteps  of  their  master,  with- 
out reaching  him,  even  in  their  happiest  moments.  Hammer,  on  the 
other  hand,  was  never  more  than  a  highly  gifted  dilettante,  whose  desire 
for  novelties  stifled  the  faculty  of  maturing  ideas.  His  capacity  for 
work  was  unbounded;  its  results  howeverlaid  down  in  numerous  volumes, 
but  apparently  solve  the  vast  problems  of  history  and  literature.  On 
his  bold  excursions,  he  often  paved  the  way  to  fields  hitherto  inaccessi- 
ble, but  keenly  discovered  by  him  to  be  worthy  of  cultivation.  It  will 
always  remain  his  distinction  that  he  made  it  possible  for  us  to  gain  a 
bird's  eye  view  over  such  fields,  and  cursory  though  it  was,  it  is  still 
valuable  on  all  points  in  which  detailed  research  has  not  replaced  his 
superficial  statements  by  more  reliable  data.  Hence  it  is  not  astonish- 
ing that  the  vienna  Orientalist  enjoyed  undisputed  fame  and  exerted 
great  influence  in  the  first  third  of  this  century.  Thus  the  danger  was 
imminent,  that  his  virtues  being  inseparable  from  his  personality,  his 
pupils  and  imitators  might  after  his  death  seize  only  upon  his  weak 
points  and  develop  them  into  a  radically  false  and  highly  dangerous 
system.  It  is  doubtful  whether  any  of  the  German  representatives  of 
DeSacy  w,ould  have  been  able  successfully  to  combat  this  method.  De- 
spite their  merits,  not  oneof  the  investigators  named  was  distinguished 

*  See  H.  Dereubourg,  Rente  critique,  1809,  No.  35,  p.  132. 


512  MEMOIR    OF    FLEISCHER. 

by  that  combination  of  wide  knowledge  and  philological  accuracy  which 
had  marked  De  Sacy's  work,  and  which — in  case  his  death  occurred  as 
early  as  was  feared,*  would  have  to  be  the  characteristics  of  a  successor, 
whose  influence  was  to  counteract  Hammer's.  Kosegarten  approached 
this  ideal  most  closely,  unless  we  except  Kodiger,  who  if  not  totally  in- 
dependent of  De  Sacy,  had  at  least  not  been  trained  in  his  school.  But 
neither  devoted  himself  exclusively  to  Arabic- Mohammedan  philology; 
and  the  same  objection,  to  a  still  stronger  degree,  holds  of  Kiickert, 
whose  interests  were  chiefly  poetic.  Thus  it  was  Fleischer  alone  in 
whom  the  ideal  was  fully  realized.  To  him  therefore  naturally  fell  the 
task  of  placing  our  science  upon  the  same  eminence  in  Germany  that 
it  had  occupied  under  De  Sacy  in  France, — a  task  rendered  difficult  by 
the  necessity  of  guiding  it  so  that  it  might  permanently  be  rescued  from 
the  crooked  path  into  which  it  might  have  been  forced  under  Hammer's 
influence. 

It  is  impossible  for  me  to  judge  whether  Fleischer,  at  the  time  of  en- 
tering upon  the  duties  of  his  Leipzig  professorship,  had  conceived  his 
mission  as  clearly  as  we  can  now  formulate  it  after  its  accomplish- 
ment. At  all  events,  the  two  essays  with  which  he  introduced  himself 
upon  the  arena  of  his  future  successes  seems  to  bear  unequivocal  signs 
that  this  was  his  conscious  goal.  When  he  was  no  more  than  "  Pro- 
fessor-elect of  Oriental  languages  at  the  University  of  Leipzig,"  he  pub- 
lished, while  at  Dresden,  his  translation  of  Zamachshari's  Golden  Neck- 
laces, with  a  preface  and  notes,  containing  a  sharp  attack  on  Hammer's 
edition  and  translation  of  the  same  text.  Almost  at  the  same  time  he 
reviewed  Habicht's  glosses,  in  which  there  is  surely  no  lack  of  grave 
mistakes.  In  this  last  review  his  tone  was  tht  mildest  imaginable, 
and  later,  even  when  dealing  with  bunglers  of  the  worst  sort,  he  never 
became  vehement.  If  then  in  opposing  Hammer  he  made  use  of  more 
violent  language,  he  must  have  been  actuated  by  serious  and  far-reach- 
ing considerations.  In  fact,  he  states  them  at  the  beginning  of  the 
preface  in  these  words:  '*  If  highly  esteemed  scholars  in  possession  of 
eveiy  facility,  at  a  time  when  science  has  reached  its  manhood,  give 
thoroughly  useless  work  to  the  world,  what  should  be  the  attitude  of 
criticism?  It  is  our  opinion  that  its  sharpest  weapons  should  be  di- 
rected against  such  abuses,  and  in  this  case  it  should  combat  even  such 
as  are  really  beneath  criticism,  in  order  that  their  becoming  contagious 
may  be  prevented."  The  man,  comparatively  speaking  a  novice,  who 
thus  met  a  scholar,  universally  looked  upon  as  the  most  eminent  orien- 
talist in  Germany,  must  have  felt  the  assurance  of  victory.  The  con- 
tents of  his  essay  justified  his  bold  language,  and  a  still  further  justifi- 
cation was  furnished  by  his  Dissertatio  critica  de  glossis  Habichtianis 
in  quatuor  priores  lomos  Ml  noctium,  which  appeared  in  the  following 
year  (1836),  on  the  occasion  of  his  entering  upon  the  duties  of  his  chair. 
On  account  of  the  minutise  of  mediaeval  Muslim  life  described,  the 

*  He  died  iu  1838. 


MEMOIR    OF    FLEISCHER.  513 

"Arabian  Nights,"  require  complete  mastery  of  the  whole  domain  of 
Arabic-Mohammedan  life,  for  a  thorough  understanding  of  all  the 
difficulties  that  grow  out  of  the  language  and  the  subject-matter.  Of 
this  mastery  the  essay  testifies  abundantly,  as  it  does  of  the  unerring 
philological  tact  of  the  critic,  whose  emendations  by  no  means  are  the 
happy  suggestions  of  an  ingenious  mind,  but  rather  the  results  of  wide 
linguistic  and  historical  knowledge,  and  of  intimate  acquaintance  with 
the  habits  of  copyists  and  the  manner  of  transmitting  manuscripts. 

For  obvious  reasons,  it  is  not  easy — and  so  far  as  I  am  concerned  it 
is  at  this  moment  not  possible — to  trace  the  impression  made  by  the 
two  essays  when  first  published;  but  their  success  shows  that  it  must 
have  been  deep  and  lasting.  The  same  complete  mastery  of  the  sub- 
ject is  displayed  by  Fleischer's  next  works  :  All's  One  Hundred  Proverbs 
(1837),  a  description  of  the  Arabic,  Persian,  and  Turkish  manuscripts 
in  the  Catalogue  Librorum  MSS.  BibL  Cii'it.  Lipsiensis  (1838),  and  the 
completion  of  Habicht's  edition  of  the  Arabian  Nights  (vols.  ix-xn, 
1842-'43).  But  the  character  of  the  subjects  treated  in  these  works  was 
not  calculated  to  confer  controlling  influence  upon  them.  Likewise  his 
edition  in  1847  of  Mirza  Mohammed  Ibrahim's  Grammar  of  the  modern 
Persian  Language  (2d  edition,  1875),  merely  strengthened  the  impression 
derived  from  All's  Proverbs,  that  this  scholar  had  as  wide  an  acquain- 
tance with  Persian  as  with  Arabic.  Thus,  directly  or  indirectly,  it 
must  be  due  to  these  two  short  essays  that  Fleischer,  as  early  as  the 
fourth  decade  of  this  century,  was  freely  acknowledged  by  all,  except- 
ing perhaps  the  immediate  followers  of  Hammer,  as  the  chief  of  Ger- 
man orientalists.  In  fact,  from  that  time  on  for  a  period  of  nearly  half 
a  century,  he  became  the  chosen  guide  of  all  Germans  and  many 
foreigners,  desirous  of  thorough  disciplining  in  Arabic  Mohammedan 
philology.  The  impression  created  by  these  two  works  was  so  strong, 
because  they  are  an  exemplification  of  the  true  philological  method  for 
which  the  Germans,  after  the  death  of  Reiske,  the  vir  incon^arabili.s, 
once  more  had  to  resort  to  the  Frenchman  De  Sacy, — a  method  which 
is  nothing  less  than  the  use  of  common  sense,  coupled  on  the  one  hand 
with  faithful,  untiring  efforts  to  attain  to  the  greatest  possible  complete- 
ness and  to  scrupulous  accuracy  in  the  collecting  and  sifting  of  the 
material  handed  down  to  us,  and  forbidding,  on  the  other  hand,  all  ar- 
bitrariness, however  ingenious,  as  well  as  all  superficiality,  however 
grandiose.  This  definition  by  no  means  puts  an  interdict  upon  clever- 
ness on  the  part  of  the  philologist  thus  gifted.  It  merely  provides  that 
cleverness  must  manifest  itself  in  mastering  the  details  acquired,  not  in 
speciously  hiding  the  imperfections  of  scientific  research  and  then  sat- 
isfying one's  conscience  by  a  perfunctory  though  minute  adherence  to  a 
traditional  method.  That  Fleischer  realized  in  himself  this  ideal  of  a 
philologist  peihaps  best  marks  his  importance  in  the  history  of  science; 
his  example  as  well  as  his  precept  have  made  it  possible  for  all  to  gain  a 
knowledge  of  the  correct  method  to  be  used  in  our  department  of  re- 
H.  Mis.  2J4 33 


514  MEMOIR    OF    FLEISCHER. 

search.  Many  of  the  most  prominent  scholars  of  the  present  day  have 
in  other  ways  arrived  at  a  knowledge  of  this  method,  or  have  been  in- 
tuitively gifted  with  it,  but  its  spread  to  extended  circles  we  owe  to 
Eleischer,  and  to  him  alone 

His  disinclination  to  treat  philological  subjects  according  to  routine 
methods  was  shown  by  Fleischer  in  his  edition  of  Beidhawi's  Coian  com- 
mentary, which  completed  his  fame,  and  which,  in  a  way  is  to  be  con- 
sidered the  most  important  work  of  his  life.  He,  Gottfried  Hermann's 
disciple,  who  surely  knew  what  elements  constitute  a  "methodical" 
edition  of  a  work,  published  this  voluminous  and  difficult  text  with- 
out any  variant  readings.  I  have  elsewhere*  shown  what  consider- 
ations, in  my  opinion,  justly  led  him  to  adopt  a  system  unusual 
even  with  himself.  The  character  of  a  Corau  commentary  is,  in  every 
respect,  technical.  He  who  would  understand  and  edit  it  must  first 
have  extensive  and  detailed  acquaintance  with  the  contents  and  techni- 
cal peculiarities  of  the  theological,  juridical,  and  grammatical  system 
of  the  Islam.  But  so  enviable  a  scholar,  aided  by  all  available  manu- 
scripts and  super-commentaries,  certainly  has  the  ability  in  every  case 
to  select  the  correct  reading;  and  superfluous  readings  serve  but  to 
confuse  less  learned  readers.  The  responsibility  incurred  by  an  editor 
who  takes  it  upon  himself  to  omit  customary  technicalities  is  propor- 
tionately great.  But  whoever  heard  Fleiescher  himself  interpret  his 
own  Beidhawi  a  single  time,  was  forever  delivered  from  all  uneasiness 
on  the  score  of  his  power  to  meet  such  responsibility.  This  edition  is 
naturally  not  purged  of  every  human  imperfection.  Fleischer  himself, 
in  a  lecture  on  one  occasion,  expressed  his  vexation  that  after  the 

£ 

feminine  ^,  ^£\    the    expression  ^\          ^\  instead    of   the    correct 
J/ 

i"1 
word    y\        J  had  escaped  him.     (  Cf.  Fell's  Index,  p.  07.)     But  such 

instances  assuredly  are  not  numerous.  On  another  occasion  he  related 
that  a  copy  of  his  book — (I  no  longer  remember  how  and  when) — had 
been  submitted  to  the  Sheikh  nl-Islam  at  Constantinople,  and  that  the 
latter  had  considered  it  beneath  his  dignity  to  throw  even  a  superficial 
glance  at  an  ignorant  infidel's  disfigurement  of  the  classical  work  of 
Mohammedan  theology.  Finally  however  he  had  opened  it  and 
glanced  at  a  few  lines ;  then,  amazed  had  eagerly  continued  to  read, 
at  last  giving  expression  to  his  astonishment  that,  in  the  Occident,  there 
could  exist  a  man  who  apparently  understood  Beidhawi  as  well  as  an 
orthodox  doctor.  I  quote  these  remarks  of  Fleischer,  which  1  heard 
myself,  since  I  should  consider  it  presumption  were  I  to  praise  his 
Beidhawi.  He  only  has  the  privilege  of  doing  this  who  is  so  well 
versed  in  Muslim  theology,  that  he  might  on  a  proper  occasion,  criticise 
it.  Whether  there  are — outside  of  the  Orient — a  half-dozen  scholars 

*  Golfing,  gelehrte.  Anzeigen.  1884,  No.  24,  p.  961. 


MEMOIR    OF   FLEISCHER.  515 

who  may  venture  to  make  this  assertion  is  doubtful ;  at  all  events,  I  do 
not  reckon  myself  among  them. 

Aside  from  a  small  edition  of  the  Hermes  trismegistus,  written  in  1870, 
on  a  special  occasion,  Beidhawi  is  the  last  work  published  by  Fleischer 
without  assistance.  Even  Beidhawi  was  not  complete  when  it  left  the 
hands  of  the  publisher.  For  years  the  Indices  weighed  heavily  upon 
his  conscientious  mind,  until  finally  in  1878,  they  were  brought  out  by 
the  helpful  aid  of  Fell.  With  reference  to  this  unusual  delay,  Fleischer 
said  in  the  preface  with  which  he  introduces  his  pupil's  work:  "  Qui 
me  rescue  meas  norunt,  eos  me  ultro  excmatnm  habere  scio,"  and  his  mean- 
ing was  evident  to  all.  During  the  period  while  he  was  busy  with  the 
Beidhawi  text,  the  claims  made  upon  him  from  all  sides  had  increased 
with  his  growing  fame.  These  claims  were  put  forth  chiefly  by  three 
parties:  his  pupils,  his  co-laborers,  and  the  community  at  large.  His 
manner  of  satisfying  them  illustrates  the  most  admirable  traits  in  his 
character:  extreme  conscientiousness,  faithful  attention  to  the  slightest 
details,  affability  and  absolute  unselfishness. 

His  conscientiousness  and  faithfulness  were  pre  eminently  evinced  in 
his  academic  labors,  as  I  can  testify  from  personal  experience  in  the 
years  1867  and  1868.  He  knew  Beidhawi  thoroughly ;  daily,  at  any 
chance  occasion,  he  excited  admiration  by  his  clear  explanation  of  the 
doctrines  of  Mohammedan  scholasticism,  or  by  his  equally  correct  way 
of  tracing  the  history  of  a  word  and  its  development  in  meaning  from 
the  Arabic  through  the  Persian  to  the  Turkish, — all  this  without  refer- 
ring, except  in  rare  instances,  to  his  inter-leaved  copy  of  Freytag, 
famous  on  account  of  its  marginal  notes,  literally  covering  the  text  as 
well  as  the  inter-leaves.  Yet  he  never  lectured  on  Beidhawi  without 
preparation.  His  students,  coming  to  attend  a  lecture  at  his  study 
early  in  the  morning,  frequently  found  him  standing  by  a  high  desk, 
the  text  and  a  copy  of  Sheikh  Zade's  super  commentary  lying  before 
him.  In  his  "Arabic  Association,"  difficult  passages  in  various  texts 
were  discussed,  opportunity  was  given  to  gain  practice  in  the  reading 
ot  manuscripts,  etc.  But  outside  of  this,  he  gave  instruction,  at  the 
period  spoken  of,  only  in  the  writings  of  Arabic,  Persian,  and  Turkish 
authors.  The  texts  selected  for  reading  varied,  frequently  according 
to  the  wishes  of  the  students.  But  the  two  lectures  a  week  on  Beid- 
hawi were  inviolable.  In  these,  he  himself  translated  and  explained, 
frequently  cross-questioning  his  hearers,  in  order  to  assure  himself  that 
they  had  grasped  his  meaning  and  were  making  good  progress.  In 
the  remaining  four  to  six  hours  a  week,  Arabic,  Persian,  and  Turkish 
texts  were  given  to  the  students  to  translate,  their  translations  being 
corrected  and  elucidated  by  the  professor  on  the  spot.  In  conducting 
this  exercise  his  talk  wandered  from  topic  to  topic,  so  that  in  looking 
back  it  appears  that  not  the  reading  of  the  texts  was  of  prime  impor- 
tance, but  rather  the  wealth  of  information,  relating  to  the  subject- 
matter,  chiefly  however  of  a  linguistic  nature,  which  he  fairly  showered 


516  MEMOIR    OF   FLEISCHER. 

from  out  of  the  plenitude  of  his  learning-  upon  the  eagerly  listening 
and  busily  writing  members  of  his  class.  Aside  from  the  numerous 
additions  to  one's  knowledge,  his  apparently  irregular  and  digressive 
method  of  instruction  possessed  the  advantage  of  at  once  ushering  the 
student  into  the  Mohammedan  world  of  language  and  ideas,  giving  him  a 
vivid  conception  of  the  wealth  and  pliability  of  the  Arabic  idiom,  and 
most  emphatically  reminding  him  at  eveiy  turn  of  the  necessity  of  being 
accurate  in  the  slightest  cletai!.  Naturally  it  was  at  the  same  time 
necessary  to  pursue  private  study  systematically  and  unremittingly, 
and  it  was  pre-supposed  as  a  matter  of  course.  He  who  could  and 
would  work,  had  to  acquire  rapidly  a  knowledge  of  the  languages,  and 
yield  with  docility  to  a  training  in  habits  of  accuracy ;  the  essentials 
of  Arabic,  indeed  of  all  philology.  The  undeniable  but  doubtless  in- 
tentional one-sidedness  of  this  method  is  justified  by  the  necessity  of 
helping  the  pupils  to  ground  themselves  thoroughly  in  these  funda- 
mentals. If  I  have  been  correctly  informed,  Fleischer  in  earlier  jears 
delivered  regular  courses  of  lectures,  as  for  instance  on  the  doctrinal 
theology  of  the  Islam.  From  this  it  can  be  inferred  that  his  later 
method  meant  to  lay  increased  stress  upon  the  important  and  essential 
points  which  he  had  always  emphasized.  We  were  charged  to  acquire 
Arabic,  Persian,  and  Turkish,  and  to  rid  ourselves  radically  of  any 
tendency  to  superficiality.  Having  done  that,  we  were  prepared  as 
far  as  our  ability  went  to  do  independent  and  philologically  accurate 
work  in  whatever  special  field  any  one  of  us  might  choose.  However, 
even  from  this  point  of  view,  there  is  one  more  desideratum,  appa- 
rently unprovided  for  in  this  method,  namely,  a  knowledge  of  the  tech- 
nical working  principles  of  philology,  in  any  event  a  highly  desirable 
equipment  of  the  future  philologist.  But  every  one  had  the  opportu- 
nity of  acquiring  them  while  preparing  his  thesis.  For  Fleischer's  ac- 
tivity as  a  teacher  was  by  no  means  at  an  end  when  he  had  appeared 
in  the  lecture  room  eight  or  ten  times  a  week.  His  library,  his  knowl- 
edge, his  talents  were  at  the  disposal  of  his  pupils,  and  if  any  one  of  them 
in  his  first  attempt  at  editing  a  text  was  perplexed  by  some  difficult  pas- 
sage in  the  manuscript,  he  needed  but  to  apply  to  his  ever-obliging 
teacher  to  have  the  difficulty  cleared  away.  Either  he  might  content 
himself  with  carrying  away  the  ready  explanation  or  emendation,  or  if 
he  attended  intelligently,  he  might,  in  addition,  derive  the  restricted 
number  of  principles  and  tricks  of  method,  which,  in  fact,  can  be 
summed  up  in  the  direction  to  scrutinize  carefully  the  manuscript  to  be 
explained  and  in  the  observance  of  the  two  main  injunctions  in  Lehrs's 
philological  decalogue:  "Thou  shalt  not  prostrate  thyself  before  manu- 
scripts," and  "  Thou  shalt  not  take  the  name  method  in  vain."  Finally, 
when  the  time  came  for  the  young  scholar  to  leave  Leipzig,  perhaps 
soon  after  receiving  his  degree,  the  bond  that  linked  him  to  Fleischer 
was  by  no  means  severed.  Whenever  and  in  whatever  way  he  wished 
he  could  apply  to  Fleischer  for  a  solution  of  problems  and  difficulties. 


MEMOIR   OF   FLEISCHER.  517 

In  his  kindness  of  heart  he  was  indefatigable  in  replying  and  explain- 
ing, often  himself  correcting  proof-sheet  upon  proof-sheet.  Each  of  us 
was  sure  to  find  in  him  as  long  as  we  lived  a  firm  scientific  support. 
I  do  not  care  to  mar  this  remembrance  of  a  teacher's  touching  unselfish- 
ness and  faithfulness  by  questioning  whether  these  characteristics  were 
always  appealed  to  with  the  reserve  rendered  doubly  necessary  by  so 
ample  a  benevolence.  lie  himself  never  gave  this  question  a  thought. 
He  existed  for  his  pupils  as  long  as  he  supposed  them  at  all  interested 
in  science.  Therefore  no  one  called  him  anything  but  "the  Sheikh  ;" 
unless  led  by  the  exuberant  spirits  of  youth,  we  translated  the  Arabic 
expression  by  "  the  old  man  "  (which  after  all  was  indicative  of  our  un- 
bounded respect  for  him),  for  this  Arabic  title  of  honor  conveys  an  idea- 
of  the  parental  relation  existing  between  the  teacher  and  the  pupil, 
which  is  assumed  as  a  matter  of  course  in  the  Mohammedan  East. 

But  he  was  not  our  u  Sheikh  "  alone.  Long  before  I  was  permitted  to 
become  one  of  his  disciples,  he  had  been  acknowledged  the  "  sheikh- 
ush  slmyukh,"  the  master  of  masters.  To  a  certain  extent  it  was  natural 
that  he  should  have  come  to  occupy  this  rank.  His  pupils  had  de- 
veloped into  co  investigators,  and  they  could  not  well  entertain  the  idea 
of  supplanting  him.  But  great  as  was  their  number,  there  was  still  no 
lack  of  men,  who,  having  been  disciples  of  Ewald,  Rodiger,  Freytag, 
and  others,  might  preserve  their  independence.  In  a  still  higher  degree 
this  was  true  of  partial  contemporaries,  such  as  Dorn  and  Rodiger.  Xo 
one  will  deny  that  this  state  of  affairs  was  salutary  for  our  science. 
Under  all  circumstances  i  is  baneful  for  one  school,  no  matter  how  ex- 
cellent its  principles  or  its  representatives  may  be,  to  exercise  autocratic 
sway  in  a  given  domain.  In  some  respects  it  must  be  one  sided,  and 
one  sidedness  is  fatal  to  science.  Now,  from  what  has  been  said  of 
Fleischer  as  a  teacher,  it  follows  that  nothing  was  further  removed  from 
his  mind  than  to  force  his  pupils  into  a  narrow-minded  course.  If 
nevertheless  any  one  is  disposed  to  harbor  this  opinion,  let  him  but 
read  Fleischer's  preface  to  Behruauer's  translation  of  the  Forty  Viziers 
to  learn  differently.  But  as  was  natural,  his  disciples  at  first  had  to 
abandon  themselves  to  his  guidance.  The  necessity  was  constantly 
arising  to  refer  them  to  the  Arabic  grammar,  when  once  they  began  to 
do  independent  work  in  the  preparation  of  texts,  always  of  a  grammati- 
cal nature,  since  such  are  easiest  for  a  well-trained  Arabist.  Thus  it 
had  to  come  about  that  for  a  time  Arabic  grammar  seemed  to  thrive 
almost  too  luxuriantly  in  these  circles.  Since  then  it  has  become  ap- 
parent that  the  danger  was  not  very  great.  It  must  be  conceded  how- 
ever that  its  complete  avoidance  was  greatly  due  to  the  efforts  of  those 
scholars  who  remained  independent  of  Fleischer;  that  is  to  say,  inde- 
pendent of  his  instruction,  not  of  his  influence.  It  could  not  be  gain- 
said ;  he  was  the  most  learned  of  the  learned,  the  most  accurate  of  the 
accurate.  It  is  therefore  not  remarkable  that  the  recognition  of  his 
scientific  superiority,  readily  yielded  by  all  prominent  scholars,  with 


518  MEMOIR    OF    FLEISCHER. 

one  or  two  exceptions,  gradually  led  to  the  establish ment  of  personal 
relations,  in  which  he  always  gave  more  than  he  received.  His  co-la- 
borers in  Germany,  as  well  as  in  more  than  one  foreign  land,  by  degrees 
grew  accustomed  to  ask  his  advice,  claim  his  help,  which  he  granted 
to  strangers  as  freely  as  to  his  own  pupils.  Thus  it  happened  that  for 
many  a  year  no  Arabic  text  of  any  importance  was  printed  in  Germany 
without  owing  to  him  considerable  improvements,  and  likewise  more 
than  one  valuable  work  by  foreign  Arabists  has  received  similar  aid. 
Sometimes  he  revised  the  proof-sheets  as  they  were  printed  ;  sometimes, 
after  the  appearance  of  single  volumes,  he  arranged  the  notes,  taken 
during  its  careful  perusal,  so  that  they  might  profitably  be  used  in  ap- 
pendices, possibly  to  be  added.  There  is  quite  a  library  of  Arabic  writ- 
ings, in  the  building  up  of  which  he  has  thus  participated.  Here  are 
some  of  the  important  works,  selected  athap-hnzard:  Ainari's  Bibliotheca 
Arabo-Sicula,  Juynboll's  Abulmahdsin,  the  Makkari,  Tornberg's  Ibn  el- 
Athir^  Wustenfeld's  Jacilt,  Fliigel's  Fihrist,  Wright's  Kdmil,  de  Goeje's 
Bibliotheca  Geographorum,  Jahn's  Ibn  Ta'ish.  This  critical  work  was 
naturally  accompanied  by  an  extensive  correspondence,  which  took  the 
more  time  as  it  was  conducted  with  an  almost  exaggerated  conscientious- 
ness. But  in  no  other  way  could  these  numberless  connections  have 
been  maintained  so  regularly  and  so  steadfastly. 

As  Oriental  studies  advanced  in  Germany  the  necessity  of  establish- 
ing closer  connections  between  the  representatives  of  the  different  de- 
partments was  keenly  felt  early  in  the  third  decade  of  this  century. 
To  effect  a  union  of  this  kind  Ewald,  Kosegarten,  liodiger,  Itiickert, 
and  some  others  established,  in  1837,  the  Journal  for  the  Science  of  the 
Orient  (Zeitschrift  fur  die  Eunde  des  Morgenlandes).  From  1838,  the 
philologists'  conventions  offered  place  and  opportunity  for  personal 
intercourse  between  men  in  all  departments  of  Oriental  research.  Thus 
BSdiger  was  but  giving  shape  to  f»n  idea  that  had  long  been  enter- 
tained when  he  proposed  on  the  occasion  of  a  visit,  in  September,  1843, 
at  Fleischer's  house,  where  Pott,  Olshauseu,  von  der  Gabelentz,  and 
Brockhaus  were  also  present,  thatGerman  orientalists,  as  a  body,  should 
hold  sessions  annually  in  connection  with  the  conventions  of  philolo- 
gists. As  is  well  known,  this  plan  was  executed  in  1844,  at  the  Dresden 
meeting.  The  consultations  held  there  resulted  in  the  formation,  at 
next  year's  meeting,  on  October  2,  1845,  at  Darmstadt,  of  a  German 
Oriental  Society,  modelled  after  the  Societe  Asiatique  and  the  Royal 
Asiatic  Society.  The  Journal  of  the  new  society  absorbed,  in  1847,  the 
Zeitschrift  fur  die  Kunde  di'S  Morgenlandes.  From  the  first,  Fleischer 
displayed  zealous  interest  in  the  plan.  The  Dresden  council  was  held 
under  his  presidency,  and  the  first  draught  of  the  constitution  issued  from 
his  pen.  His  certificate  of  membership  was  the  first  conferred,  and,  up 
to  the  time  of  his  resignation  from  the  governing  body,  in  1880,  it  may 
be  said,  without  disparagement  to  many  faithful  and  deserving  men, 
that  he  was  the  soul  of  the  association,  unselfishly,  as  always,  devoting 


MEMOIR    OF    FLEISCHER.  519 

his  best  powers  to  the  common  good.  His  help  was  given  wherever  it 
was  needed  ;  he  served  as  editor  of  the  Journal,  and  again  as  chroni- 
cler of  the  year's  work;  lie  was  called  upon  to  pass  judgment  on 
works  that  were  to  be  published  under  the  auspices  of  the  society,  and 
to  correct  them ;  and  sometimes  he  Irid  to  act  as  mediator  between 
opposing  parties  that  had  sprung  up  within  the  society.  The  society 
thus  became  dear  to  his  heart,  as  does  a  child  that  has  been  raised  with 
care  and  trouble  to  man's  estate.  Nothing  (unless  it  were  a  falsehood) 
vexed  him  so  much  as  an  injury  done  the  society,  or  failure  to  fullill 
punctually  the  duties  imposed  by  membership.  While  occupying  the 
position  in  the  governing  board  of  executive  in  matters  relating  to  the 
library,  he  took  upon  himself  the  unpleasant  task  of  making  a  quar- 
terly list  of  all  books  and  pamphlets  that  had  been  sent  to  him,  and  in- 
closing it  in  the  chest  of  books  forwarded  to  the  librarian  at  Halle. 
Later,  when  direct  communications  between  the  library  and  the  corre- 
spondents of  the  society  were  established,  this  work  was  no  longer  neces- 
sary. Up  to  that  time,  while  I  was  librarian  of  the  society,  many  a  list 
of  that  kind  passed  from  his  hand  into  mine.  I  do  not  remember  ever 
to  have  found  an  error  in  a  single  one;  but  I  know  that  I  often  wished 
that  he  would  not  waste  precious  time  on  unimportant  work,  for  which 
he  might  have  found  dozens  of  willing  hands  near  him.  But  he  would 
have  eyed  with  suspicion  the  man  who  would  suggest  that  he  should 
transfer  to  others  what  lie  considered  his  own  duty.  Undoubtedly  he 
was  right,  for  the  society  would  never  have  turned  out  to  be  such  as  it 
is  if  he  had  not  had  so  conscientious  a  conception  of  duty.  He  was  re- 
paid by  the  pleasure  of  seeing  it  grow  and  thrive;  soon  it  could  fitly 
range  itselt  by  the  side  of  older  associations  abroad;  and  among  the 
learned  bodies  of  Germany  it  occupied  a  respected  position.  On  one  oc- 
casion, to  be  sure,  this  position  caused  him  much  unpleasantness,  namely 
when  the  directors  had  to  advise  the  Prussian  Government  as  to  the 
purchase  of  the  Moabite  antiquities,  which  subsequently  proved  spuri- 
ous. This  is  not  the  place  and  nowhere  is  it  concern  of  mine  to  raise 
anew  the  dust  under  which  this  unfortunate  affair  has  finally  been 
buried.  The  proper  conception  of  the  province  of  a  business  committee 
is  expressed  in  a  resolution,  afterwards  adopted  by  the  general  con- 
vention of  the  German  Oriental  Society :  "  In  consequence  of  the  position 
assigned  by  the  constitution  to  the  board  of  directors  of  the  society,  any 
opinion  published  by  them  on  scientific  and  more  particularly  on  dis- 
puted points,  cannot  be  construed  to  express  the  opinion  of  the  society."* 
Fleischer  may  have  permitted  a  1'atal  mistake  to  be  made,  but  he  after- 
wards generously  assumed  more  of  the  responsibility  than  was  neces- 
sary. 

Surely  no  one  who  once  more  passes  in  review  his  extensive  and 
varied  work,  evtm  in  the  incomplete  survey  that  1  have  just  made,  can 
find  reason  to  doubt  the  truth  of  what  Fleischer  further  says  in  the 

*  Zeit8chrift  der  Deutachen  Morgenlandischen  Gestllschaft,  vol.  xxxi,  p.  xv. 


520  MEMOIR    OF    FLEISCHER 

above  quoted  passage  from  his  preface  to  Fell's  Indices :  "Ceteri*  adsevero 
otium  mihi  et  vires  defuisse,  non  voluntatcm  ct  sttidium."  Certainly  then 
it  was  uot  possible  for  him  to  find  leisure  for  the  preparation  and  exe- 
cution of  comprehensive  works  embodying  the  results  of  independent 
research.  The  translation  of  the  Goran,  the  work  of  many  years,  was 
left  uncompleted.  However,  not  all  his  powers  were  absorbed  by  his 
efforts  in  behalf  of  his  pupils,  his  colleagues,  and  the  learned  world  in 
general.  He  devoted  every  leisure  moment  to  his  appointed  task  of 
maintaining  Arabic-Mohammedan  philology  upon  the  eminence  to  which 
De  Sacy  had  raised  it,  and  if  possible  of  elevating  it  still  higher.  He 
diligently  continued  up  to  the  last  moment  the  critical  work  that  had 
opened  new  paths  to  science  upon  his  first  appearance.  For  a  long  time 
he  wrote  reviews  of  new  books  in  the  Hallische  Litter aturzeitung,  in 
Gersdorf's  Repertorium  and  in  other  journals,  but  afterwards  exclusively 
in  the  Zcitschrift  der  Deutschen  Morgenlandischen  Gesellschafl.  For  the 
readers  of  the  Beitrage,  special  mention  may  be  made  of  his  detailed 
notices  of  the  re  modelled  edition  of  Eiickert's  Poetics  and  Rhetoric  of 
the  Persians,  and  of  Bacher's  edition  of  Sa'di's  short  poems,  both  repub- 
lished  in  the  third  volume  of  his  Minor  Works.  Besides,  he  contrib- 
uted extensively  to  the  improvement  of  the  various  editions  of  Arabic 
texts,  especially  of  Makkari  and  Abuluiahasin,  and  wrote  a  number  of 
short  articles  on  chance  topics  connected  with  Arabic,  Persian,  and 
Turkish  literature,  history,  and  archeology,  as  they  were  suggested  to 
him  by  hints  in  his  correspondence,  in  his  official  work  for  the  German 
Oriental  Society,  etc.  Two  great  series,  by  far  the  most  important  in 
a  mass  of  highly  instructive  material,  must  be  noted :  the  celebrated 
contributions  (Beitrtige)  to  De  Sacy's  Grammaire  Arabe,  and  those  to 
Dozy's  Supplement  aux  dictionnaires  arabes. 

"  Grammatici  Arabes  utilissimi  nobis  (suntenim  thesauri  for  mar  um  totius 
que  antiquitatis  promi  condi)"  was  the  opinion  of  E  wald.*  It  is  perhaps 
De  JSacy's  greatest  distinction  that  he  put  Arabic  philology  upon  this 
basis,  and  no  less  deserving  of  praise  is  Fleischer  for  having  continued 
and  supplemented  this  work  in  a  spirit  of  modesty  and  life-long  devotion 
to  his  beloved  teacher,  aided  by  the  superior  knowledge  which  he  had 
learned  how  to  acquire  in  the  school  of  De  Sacy.  Those  endowed  with 
unusual  talent,  and  furnished  besides  with  a  peculiar  gift  for  the  Arabic 
language,  may  succeed  in  understanding  Arabic,  and  in  avoiding  all  the 
hidden  snares  in  the  characters  the  vocabulary  and  the  syntax,  laid  for 
the  guileless  reader  by  this  most  treacherous  of  all  languages  with 
which  I  am  acquainted.  But  the  average  scholar  is  lost,  that  is  to  say 
sinks  back  upon  a  lamentably  low  stage  of  philological  development, 
unless  he  masters  thoroughly  his  De  Sacy  with  Fleischer's  additions. 
That  diligent  and  willing  students  are  no  longer  exposed  to  this  danger 
of  retrograding  we  owe  to  "the  old  man."  And  the  place  tilled  in  its 
time  by  the  worn,  interleaved  Freytag,  or  that  filled  in  the  domain  of 

*  Gramm,  crit.  ling.  Ar.,i,  p.  ir. 


MEMOIR    OF    FLEISCHER.  521 

grammar  by  De  Sacy  with  the  "  Beitrage,"  is  occupied,  on  the  field  of 
lexicography,  by  Dozy's  Xiipplem en f,  enriched  by  Fleischer's  corrections 
and  additions.  His  "  Minor  Works,"  covering,  together  with  the  others 
mentioned,  2225  pages,  are  a  legacy,  the  conscientious  use  of  which  will, 
for  a  long  time,  continue  to  be  the  prime  duty  of  every  scientific  Ara- 
bist 

We  should  use  it  however  not  only  conscientiously,  but  also  with 
the  most  grateful  remembrance.  We  should  always  bear  in  mind  that 
Fleischer,  in  order  to  become  for  his  pupils  and  co-laborers  what  he  was 
to  them,  refrained  from  working  for  himself  except  by  working  for 
others,  and  this  at  a  time  when  his  powers  were  at  their  height  and  his 
comprehensive  learning  in  its  ripest  state. 

Possibly  many  a  one  has  shared  the  feeling  of  a  prominent  and 
clever  co-laborer  of  mine,  who  said  to  me  some  years  ago  that  it  vexed 
him  to  think  that  Fleischer,  with  his  magnificent  learning  and  ability, 
was  deserting  from  the  solution  of  the  highest  problems.  I  can  not 
agree  with  my  nameless  friend.  Diverse  gifts — one  mind.  Some,  vent- 
uring fearlessl}'  abroad,  are  permitted  to  discover  new  domains ;  others 
secure  law  and  order  at  home.  Not  the  one  by  itself,  nor  the  other  is 
the  desideratum.  The  one  cannot  stand  without  the  other.  When 
Fleischer  came  upon  the  stage  we  stood  in  need  of  law  and  order, 
which  he  secured.  Now,  let  the  venturesome  go  forth  upon  voyages  of 
discovery;  the  less  talented  will  still  do  well  to  remain  at  home  and 
watch  lest  law  and  order  be  undermined.  Certainly  it  would  have 
been  a  great  achievement  if,  for  instance,  our  sheikh  had  built  up  the 
edifice  of  Islamic  doctrines  for  us.  But  has  he  not  done  better  in  sharp- 
ening tools  for  many  generations  of  workers,  so  that  now  they  may 
themselves  build,  not  so  quickly  and  not  so  high,  but  on  a  broad  base 
and  with  many  wings  ? 

"  Let  me  say  briefly  that  from  my  early  youth  I  have  dimly  felt  the 
desire  and  hope  to  cultivate  myself,  my  whole  self,  such  as  it  is,"  writes 
Wilhelm  Meister  to  his  wise  friend  Werner.  Man's  duty  with  regard 
to  his  own  gifts  has  never  been  expressed  more  pertinently.  Fleischer's 
was  a  sagacious,  acute,  and  sensible  mind.  He  in  nowise  sympathized 
with  what  is  mystic  and  ambiguous.  A  critic  by  nature,  he  exercised 
his  critical  faculties  not  only  upon  others,  but  also  and  chiefly  upon 
himself.  Besides,  he  was  faithful  to  duty,  a  lover  of  truth,  benevolent, 
humbly  self-sacrificing,  and  single-minded.  Not  one  of  these  natural 
traits  did  he  fail  to  cultivate  conscientiously,  nor  did  he  ever  attempt 
to  lay  false  claims  to  virtues  which  he  did  not  possess.  A  man  of  this 
kind  could  not  fail  to  see  that  only  by  means  of  self-restraint  can  one 
succeed  in  perfectly  cultivating  one's  own  nature.  In  no  respect, — 
neither  in  his  views,  nor  in  his  studies, — was  he  one-sided;  but  he  knew 
accurately  wherein  his  strength  lay,  and  was  too  sensible  to  sin  against 
the  proverb:  "  Qid  trop  embrasse,  mal  etreint."  "  //  ucfnut  pax  courir 
deux  lievres  a  lafois,"  he  once  wrote  to  me,— (he  often  delighted  in  using 


522  MEMOIR    OF    FLEISCHER. 

the  French  language,  which  he  had  mastered  perfectly),  and  according 
to  this  principle  he  consistently  arranged  his  scientific  career.  In  his 
preface  to  the  Golden  Necklaces  he  says  clearly  and  decidedly :  "  In  Ara- 
bic research  neither  good  will,  nor  diligence,  nor  penetration  of  mind, 
nor  ingenuity,  nor  outside  philological  attainments,  nor  anything- in  the 
world,  can  relieve  one  from  the  necessity  of  modestly,  faithfully,  and  dili- 
gently studying  with  the  Arabic  philologists, — and  here  in  Europe, 
above  all  with  our  master  De  Sacy ;  however,  I  do  not  mean  to  imply 
that  Ewald  and  his  compeers  will  not  in  time  succeed  in  summarizing  the 
superabundant  material  of  Arabic  philology  in  a  more  fitting  and  con- 
venient form,  as  well  as  in  explaining  many  facts  in  a  more  scientific 
way."  The  justification  for  Ewald's  philological  methods  does  not  es- 
cape his  notice,  as  Ewald  in  turn  admits  that  the  Arabian  grammarians 
are  the  promi  condi  totius  antiquitatis.  But  Fleischer  avowedly  limits 
himself  to  the  purely  philological  side  of  the  task,  for  il  nefautpas  courir 
deux  lievres  a  lafois.  Only  once  did  he  deviate  from  this  rule,  and  then 
it  was  done  in  order  to  venture  upon  a  neighboring  domain  that  could 
not  well  be  avoided,  that  of  general  Semitic  etymology:  He  that  wishes 
to  cast  a  stone  at  him  on  this  account  may  do  so  after  consulting  St.  John 
viii,  7.  To  this  wise  self-restraint,  among  other  things,  he  owes  his  pre- 
eminence upon  that  field  of  philological  research  which  was  chosen  by 
him,  or  which  (if  you  will)  naturally  fell  to  his  share.  At  all  events  it  is 
hard  to  believe  that  any  other  field  would  have  given  the  same  scope  to 
his  natural  abili  ties.  The  undeviating  conformity  to  law  that  character- 
izes the  structure  of  the  Arabic  language  and  its  perspicuity  naturally 
appeal  to  him,  as  on  the  other  hand  its  boundless  wealth  and  apparent 
complexity  of  linguistic  phenomena  offered  welcome  problems  for  his 
ingenuity  to  solve.  He  was  thus,  by  right  of  birth,  the  expounder  of 
the  Arabic  poets  and  writers,  whose  peculiarities  are  analogous  to  those 
of  their  language.  This  partial  affinity  (for  in  other  respects,  he  was  a 
true  German  with  very  un- Arabian  feelings),  together  with  his  linguistic 
attainments  and  large  information,  permitted  him  to  reach  the  incom- 
parable skill  and  certainty  in  the  criticism  of  Arabic  texts  which  for 
the  time  at  least  did  more  than  anything  else  to  shed  luster  upon  his 
name.  Theoretically  indeed  there  is  no  difference  between  the  proper 
philological  treatment  of  a  Greek  or  Latin  and  an  Arabic  or  Persian 
text.  But  many  external  circumstances  connected  with  Mohammedan 
literature,  such  as  the  relatively  short  period  intervening  between  the 
original  writer  and  the  manuscripts  to  be  studied,  the  peculiarities  of 
Arabic  characters,  etc.,  causeless  stress  to  be  put  in  our  specialty  upon 
the  recensio,  if  I  may  be  permitted  to  use  technical  terms.  In  some  cases 
the  recensio  is  the  most  essential  part  of  the  work  5  in  most  however  it 
is  very  unimportant.  With  us  it  is  the  emendatio  that  taxes  the  critical 
faculties  to  the  utmost.  Similarly,  ours  differs  from  classical  philology, 
inasmuch  as  conjectures  with  us  are  usually  either  entirely  correct  or 
altogether  incorrect  rarely— probabilis.  Hence  it  may  be  said  that,  aside 


MEMOIR    OF    FLEISCHER.  523 

from  mere  copyists'  blunders,  it  is  easier  to  make  conjectures  in  class- 
ical philology,  but,  on  the  other  hand  ceterix  paribus  it  is  easier  for  us 
to  make  correct  conjectures  or  emendations.  For  both  reasons  we  are  not 
justified  in  resting  satisfied  with  the  mere  recensio,  as  our  Grreco-Roman 
philologiaus  may  sometimes  do.  It  follows  that  a  man  like  Fleischer 
may  not  be  disposed  of  by  praising  him  as  the  lucky  possessor  of  a  talent 
for  conjecturing,  and  then  casting  him  into  the  great  lumber-room,  where 
the  superannuated  philologists'  apparatus  is  stored.  True,  he  is  the 
author  of  thousands  of  conjectural  corrections,  but  at  least  two-thirds 
of  his  conjectures,  if  this  measure  of  worth  be  applicable,  are  emenda- 
tions. Whoever  admits  this,  will  thereby  agree  with  me  in  saying  that 
self-forgetful  work  limited  by  wise  self-restraint,  and  undertaken  with  a 
definite  aim  in  view,  is  as  a  matter  of  course  and  almost  in  opposition 
to  the  wishes  of  its  author,  rewarded  with  the  prize. 

It  is  time  to  conclude.  Fleischer's  prominent  position  in  the  history 
of  our  science  is  due  to  these  circumstances;  by  precept  and  example  he 
made  a  home  in  Germany  for  the  scientific  study  of  Arabic  Moham- 
medan philology  ;  he  trained  generations  of  scholars  with  this  purpose 
in  view ;  he  similarly  influenced  his  co-laborers  in  Germany  and  abroad; 
he  doubled  the  sum  total  of  all  the  results  reached  by  De  Sacy  in  the  spe- 
cial field  of  Arabic  language  and  literature,  and  by  his  help  the  work 
of  his  contemporaries  was  raised  to  the  eminence  occupied  by  his  own. 
There  was  no  lack  of  prominent  scholars  in  his  own  department,  nor  of 
such  as  took  up  and  supplemented  his  work  outside  of  the  limits  he 
himself  had  drawn.  Still  he  and  no  other  can  be  called  the  true  heir 
and  successor  of  De  Sacy.  In  knowledge  and  ability  he  excelled  his 
great  teacher.  But  he  himself  would  have  administered  a  sharp  reproof 
to  him  who  might  venture  to  rank  him  above  his  master,  in  scientific 

matters  :  "  Honor  be  to  him  who  leads  the  way."  ,A  I "  A\    \^u]\ 

The  unstinted  recognition  yielded  to  the  great  scholar  on  all  sides 
was  commensurate  with  his  deserts.  The  most  prominent  Orientalists  of 
Germany  and  others  of  foreign  countries  readily  acknowledged  that  his 
was  unequalled  knowledge  and  ability ;  one  learned  society  after  another 
conferred  upon  him  honorary  membership,  and  to  several  Saxon  orders 
and  the  Turkish  Medjidie  were  added  the  two  highest  scientific  distinc- 
tions in  the  giving  of  Germany, — the  Bavarian  order  of  Maximilian  and 
the  Prussian  pour  le  merite.  For  a  long  time  it  seemed  as  though  age 
itself  could  not  impair  the  octogenarian's  vigor  nor  destroy  his  love  of 
work.  However,  in  the  spring  of  1884,  there  appeared  the  first  symp- 
toms of  an  abdominal  disorder,  which  gradually  grew.  But  whoever 
saw  him  when  he  was  not  troubled  with  pain,  scarcely  noticed  any  change 
in  his  appearance, — none  whatever  in  his  manner.  On  October  19, 1885, 
1  enjoyed  the  privilege  of  participating  with  many  others  in  the  celebra- 
tion of  the  fiftieth  anniversary  of  his  official  connection  with  the  univer- 
sity, and  on  October  4, 1886,  when  I  again  visited  him  during  his  stay  at 


524  MEMOIR    OF    FLEISCHER. 

jNeti-Sohonefeld,  the  entry  in  my  diary  reads:  "Fleischer  as  bright  as 
ever."  But  in  1886.  he  was  compelled  to  avail  himself  of  the  permission 
granted  him,  on  the  occasion  of  his  jubilee  celebration,  to  omit  the  lec- 
tures of  the  summer  session,  and  the  physician's  orders  were  constantly 
limiting  the  amount  of  work  he  did.  When  again  I  visited  him  at  Leip- 
zig in  October  7,  1887,  I  felt  that  I  should  have  to  bid  him  an  eternal 
farewell.  In  spite  of  his  increasing  debility  he  began  a  course  of  lect- 
ures for  the  winter  session,  and  continued  them  until  November  17. 
But  on  November  18  he  took  to  his  bed,  never  again  to  leave  it.  He 
bore  the  pain  entailed  by  his  disease  with  admirable  patience;  no  com- 
plaint ever  crossed  his  lips,  until  on  February  10,  1888,  a  short  while 
before  completing  his  eighty-seventh  year,  death  released  him  from  his 
suffering. 

The  prominent  features  of  Fleischer's  character  were  truthfulness, 
conscientiousness,  unselfishness,  and  punctuality.  I  was  never  able  to 
decide  how  much  he  owed  to  nature,  how  much  to  the  strict  self-disci- 
pline exercised  in  early  years.  But  whatever  he  had  acquired  by  habit 
had  come  to  be  a  part  of  his  being.  He  became  indignant  nay  wrath- 
ful, the  kindliness  that  marked  his  features  and  sprung  from  good 
nature  in  the  best  meaning  of  the  word,  seemed  to  leave  him, — when  he 
met  with  falsehood,  carelessness,  or  Lack  of  punctuality.  As  long  as 
there  were  no  evidences  of  want  of  truth  on  the  part  of  others,  he  was, 
unsuspicious,  sometimes  too  much  so;  but  whoever  shocked  his  deli- 
cate sense  of  justice,  had  good  cause  to  fear  his  anger.  Yet  there  was 
not  a  trace  of  dogmatism  in  his  nature.  He  may  in  some  instances 
have  chanced  to  form  an  incorrect  judgment  of  certain  people,  but 
he  took  the  first  opportunity  to  change  it  most  willingly  in  their 
favor,  unless  weighty  reasons  existed  for  the  contrary.  All  that  he 
thought  and  did  was  characterized  by  objectivity,  pure  and  simple.  In 
scientific  debates  he  demanded  that  his  conclusions  be  tested  impar- 
tially, and  on  the  other  hand  he  accepted  instruction  from  the  young- 
est of  his  pupils,  if  he  had  chanced  to  find  something  that  had  es-. 
caped  the  notice  of  "  the  sheikh."  His  polemics  were  never  of  a  per- 
sonal nature  except  when  Ewald  accused  him,  in  a  manner  that  even 
now  impairs  the  reputation  of  this  great  man  of  "  being  actuated  by, 
sordid  impulses  in  science."  In  a  published  "  statement  addressed  to 
Prof.  Dr.  Ewald  of  Gb'ttingen,"  he  expresses  in  plain,  though  moderate 
terms,  his  just  indignation.  His  misunderstanding  with  Dozy,  whom 
Fleischer  had  unintentionally  offended,  was  cleared  up  in  a  way  that 
reflects  credit  upon  both  scholars.  He  was  conscious  of  his  abilities 
and  his  achievements,  but  never  boasted  of  them.  To  all  work  done  by 
others,  in  his  or  their  department,  he  gladly  yielded  recognition.  Un- 
hesitatingly he  subordinated  himself  in  every  respect  to  De  Sacy,  and 
to  Lane's  knowledge  of  the  Arabic,  as  (in  his  opinion)  superior  to  his 
own.  He  was  never  ambitious  of  empty  honors,  he  never  sought  to 
assert  himself. 


MEMOIR    OF    FLEISCHER.  525 

What  was  called  Fleischer's  school,  can  scarcely  be  said  any  longer 
to  exist  as  such.  Arabic  studies,  the  preponderance  of  which  formed 
the  most  distinguishing  mark  of  its  unity,  have  been  curtailed  in  Ger- 
many. A  cruel  fate  has  prematurely  removed  the  very  best  philologists 
of  Fleischer's  school :  Ralfs,  Loth,  Spitta,  and,  furthermore  Kosut  and 
Huber.  Some  of  us  have  struck  out  on  new  paths ;  general  interest  has 
been  diverted  to  Assyriological  research  and  to  comparative  philology. 
The  leadership  in  the  Arabic  domain  is  about  to  pass  over  to  the  Dutch 
school.  But  it  matters  not  what  we  do,  if  only  \ve  emulate  the  example 
of  "  our  sheikh,"  and  do  disinterested,  honest,  diligent,  conscientious, 
and  modest  work,  m  whatever  is  within  the  reach  of  our  limited  ability 


A     000130514     3 


